Filters

2016 - 20172

More filters

2019 - 201912020 - 20231
Reset filters

Settings

Author: Engelmann, Ronny × Subject: algorithm ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Assessment of lidar depolarization uncertainty by means of a polarimetric lidar simulator
    (München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2016) Bravo-Aranda, Juan Antonio; Belegante, Livio; Freudenthaler, Volker; Alados-Arboledas, Lucas; Nicolae, Doina; Granados-Muñoz, María José; Guerrero-Rascado, Juan Luis; Amodeo, Aldo; D'Amico, Giusseppe; Engelmann, Ronny; Pappalardo, Gelsomina; Kokkalis, Panos; Mamouri, Rodanthy; Papayannis, Alex; Navas-Guzmán, Francisco; Olmo, Francisco José; Wandinger, Ulla; Amato, Francesco; Haeffelin, Martial
    Lidar depolarization measurements distinguish between spherical and non-spherical aerosol particles based on the change of the polarization state between the emitted and received signal. The particle shape information in combination with other aerosol optical properties allows the characterization of different aerosol types and the retrieval of aerosol particle microphysical properties. Regarding the microphysical inversions, the lidar depolarization technique is becoming a key method since particle shape information can be used by algorithms based on spheres and spheroids, optimizing the retrieval procedure. Thus, the identification of the depolarization error sources and the quantification of their effects are crucial. This work presents a new tool to assess the systematic error of the volume linear depolarization ratio (δ), combining the Stokes–Müller formalism and the complete sampling of the error space using the lidar model presented in Freudenthaler (2016a). This tool is applied to a synthetic lidar system and to several EARLINET lidars with depolarization capabilities at 355 or 532 nm. The lidar systems show relative errors of δ larger than 100 % for δ values around molecular linear depolarization ratios (∼ 0.004 and up to ∼  10 % for δ = 0.45). However, one system shows only relative errors of 25 and 0.22 % for δ = 0.004 and δ = 0.45, respectively, and gives an example of how a proper identification and reduction of the main error sources can drastically reduce the systematic errors of δ. In this regard, we provide some indications of how to reduce the systematic errors.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    GARRLiC and LIRIC: Strengths and limitations for the characterization of dust and marine particles along with their mixtures
    (Katlenburg-Lindau : Copernicus, 2017) Tsekeri, Alexandra; Lopatin, Anton; Amiridis, Vassilis; Marinou, Eleni; Igloffstein, Julia; Siomos, Nikolaos; Solomos, Stavros; Kokkalis, Panagiotis; Engelmann, Ronny; Baars, Holger; Gratsea, Myrto; Raptis, Panagiotis I.; Binietoglou, Ioannis; Mihalopoulos, Nikolaos; Kalivitis, Nikolaos; Kouvarakis, Giorgos; Bartsotas, Nikolaos; Kallos, George; Basart, Sara; Schuettemeyer, Dirk; Wandinger, Ulla; Ansmann, Albert; Chaikovsky, Anatoli P.; Dubovik, Oleg
    The Generalized Aerosol Retrieval from Radiometer and Lidar Combined data algorithm (GARRLiC) and the LIdar-Radiometer Inversion Code (LIRIC) provide the opportunity to study the aerosol vertical distribution by combining ground-based lidar and sun-photometric measurements. Here, we utilize the capabilities of both algorithms for the characterization of Saharan dust and marine particles, along with their mixtures, in the south-eastern Mediterranean during the CHARacterization of Aerosol mixtures of Dust and Marine origin Experiment (CHARADMExp). Three case studies are presented, focusing on dust-dominated, marinedominated and dust-marine mixing conditions. GARRLiC and LIRIC achieve a satisfactory characterization for the dust-dominated case in terms of particle microphysical properties and concentration profiles. The marine-dominated and the mixture cases are more challenging for both algorithms, although GARRLiC manages to provide more detailed microphysical retrievals compared to AERONET, while LIRIC effectively discriminates dust and marine particles in its concentration profile retrievals. The results are also compared with modelled dust and marine concentration profiles and surface in situ measurements.